- Rob Bushway

Truc Bui continues his fantastic Screen Protector Shootout Series, this time focusing on Clarivue Clear screen protectors. Video below, followed by the text review:

- Rob Bushway

In part 2 of his look at the Photodon screen protectors, Truc Bui continues his great review of screen protectors.

 

 

- Truc Bui

Summary:

Pros:

· Corner to corner coverage with silicone adhesive has a very tight fit. Good craftsmanship.

· At $12 + $4.75 shipping for the T2010 that is now available, it’s extremely affordable, especially for something that’s reusable. There are no price differences for the AG or the Clear.

· Excellent writing feel with no speckling. Period. Awesome scratch resistance.

Cons:

· The same difficulties hold true for installing the full adhesive protector in a dust-free environment.

· It’s a fingerprint and palm smudge magnet. Be sure to clean every once in a while or else you’ll get screen protector scratching grit caught between the protector and the pen. In fact, that’s how I ended up with the hairline scratches.

· Scratch resistance was not as good as the AG (but taken in context, it is the best Crystal Clear to date).

In the second half of Round 5, I take a close look at the Photodon Crystal Clear film. After the disappointment of the Boxwave Crystal Clear, I was ready to throw in the towel in my quest for the perfect crystal clear screen protector. I was very hesitant and even dismissive of the Photodon even before it was put on.

Initial Impressions:

Much like its anti-glare brother, the Photodon came in a no-frills package. Photodon’s website just updated pricing on the T2010’s protector at a whopping $12 + $4.75 shipping. It’s probably the cheapest solution out there. The screen protector is of good thickness and exudes high quality.

Installation:

Installation was no problem here. With this much practice putting on and taking off screen protectors, I’ve gotten quite accustomed to installing them with little to no problem. I think the key is to install at a decently fast pace. If you go too slow it will increase the chances of introducing statically charged dust and hair particulates. If you go too fast you risk misalignment. The one good thing about these new silicone adhesive resin backing screen protectors is that if they do get riddled with debris, a simple lint remover rolled over the resin will clean the screen protector right up.

Preservation of Luminosity:

My personal preference, and hence my search for the ultimate screen protector, is to preserve the brightness and crispness of the Fujitsu native screen. It’s something you have to see to believe. I think in the T2010 vs. 2710p inkshow shows how much brighter the LED screen from Fujitsu is compared to the industry standard. Anyway, the Photodon brings back the screen quality that made me get the T2010 in the first place. Gone is the speckling! We’ll see how it holds up during the inking experience to scratches.

Writing Feel:

As I write this, I am giddy with joy. The writing feel on the Photodon is great. The screen protector is very prone to fingerprints and palm smudges, but after a few hours’ use, the grime is pretty consistent and writing feel is unaffected. Scratch resistance is great, considering it is a crystal clear type screen protector. Smoothness is a definite plus on the Photodon. Switching from the standard pen tip to the felt pen tip resulted in an even better writing feel. The felt tip provides just enough feedback that inking is an absolute joy. Don’t get me wrong, the regular standard tip is great, but I have to say I prefer the felt tip.

Outdoor Viewability:

Finally, I am able to test the viewability of a crystal clear screen protector. The Photodon does not disappoint here at all. Some people prefer the AG style screen protector because it cuts down on the reflections while in the shade. I, on the other hand, prefer the reflections because you can just focus on the screen and not the reflections. I find the AG type to diffuses too much light, which hinders viewability according to my tastes. For the Photodon Crystal Clear, the sun, if it is ever within the viewing area, becomes a point-source of light which does not really hinder outdoor viewing at all. It does take some getting used to and is completely a personal preference, but I like it a lot more than the diffusion of the sun that is characteristic of the AG type protectors.

Screen Protector Removal:

I’ve done this so many times now that removing the screen protector was very simple to me. I just took my multi-tool and pried off a corner and the rest of the screen protector came off. As with all the other screen protectors with a silicone resin adhesive, no sticky mess was left on the screen. There was no residue to worry about.

Conclusion:

I must say that the Photodon line has thoroughly impressed me. At the price point of $16.75 shipped, Photodon has combined high quality with low cost. If your screen size is not listed on the website, Photodon will custom cut you a protector for $2.00 extra. So for under $20, you get a very good performing screen protector. There were very fine hairline scratches on the screen protector after I was done, but I also put it through its paces. I doubt any of us would ink has hard or as vigorous as I did during the time the Photodon was protecting my screen. Since I am still looking for a screen protector for my T2010, I wanted to stress test it to make sure it would hold up to the most extreme uses. I must say that both Photodon screen protectors performed above expectations. I can’t recommend it enough. If you’re tired of waiting for me to finish the Shootout, you won’t go wrong in choosing the Photodon.

Come back for Round 6 where I look at Clarivue’s screen protector.

- Rob Bushway

Truc Bui continues to pump out the good stuff on screen protection for the Tablet PC, this time focusing on the Photodon Anti-Glare.

Watch the video below and read the text portion below that.

 

- Truc Bui

Photodon Anti-Glare

Summary:

Pros:

· Corner to corner coverage with silicone adhesive similar to and on par with BoxWave.

· At about $10-$12 + $4.75 shipping (it was a custom cut piece, but similar sized protectors run this much), it’s extremely affordable, especially for something that’s reusable.

· Excellent writing feel with average speckling and high resistance to scratching.

Cons:

· The same difficulties hold true for installing the full adhesive protector in a dust-free environment.

· The film seems to pick up more smudges than average, in fact, it’s almost as attractive to fingerprints and palm smudges as the native screen.

· Although reusable, cleaning off the silicone adhesive is tricky for reapplication

The 5^th round of the Screen Protector Shootout will also consist of two parts. In the first half, I will be looking at the Photodon Anti-Glare screen protector. Photodon makes all sorts of screen protectors for computers, including privacy screens, screen protectors, screen hoods, and various cleaning kits.

Initial Impressions:

The Photodon AG film came double packed with the clear Anti-Reflective screen with some informational material, a couple of sample squares, and a couple of cleaning cloths. Each protector was wrapped in simple plastic sleeves. The low cost of the protectors prohibits any extravagantly packaged extras and Photodon’s protectors won’t be winning any presentation awards. All the necessary items are in the package and nothing else. The protector itself is very reminiscent of the BoxWave with a full silicone adhesive backing with a tabbed back cover. The thickness of the protector is actually surprising, especially considering its cost. It is almost as thick as the BoxWave.

Installation:

As was expected, the Photodon applied easily with the wide width 3M squeegee. I’m getting pretty good at applying these full adhesive protectors, but that could just be from practice. To ease installation, I’ve found it best to use a cleaning solution and a lint-free microfiber cleaning cloth on the native screen itself first to eliminate any static buildup. All of the screen protectors so far have come with at least a lint-free cloth, some have come with a microfiber cloth. Even prescription glass cleaning cloths would work towards this purpose. Use of a thick matte board or poster board (be sure to use the cleaning cloth to protect the screen protector in case your applicator is sharp) will greatly help the installation process happen in one pass.

Preservation of Luminosity:

Optical quality with the Photodon is great. As with all AG protectors tested thus far, some speckling does occur. The Photodon isn’t as speckly as the BoxWave, however. In terms of preservation of screen quality, the Photodon AG is on par for the course. The Photodon seems much more susceptible to picking up palm smudges and fingerprints than the other protectors tested so far. It’s almost as prone to smudging as the native screen. Perhaps there is less speckling due to the Photodon AG being slightly thinner than the BoxWave. We’ll see if this has any affect on scratch resistance.

Writing Feel:

I couldn’t believe it when I did the writing test. Did I accidentally put on another BoxWave? The writing feel is at least as good as the much more expensive BoxWave. The only difference here is the smudge factor. You’ll see in the video where I go crazy with the pen on the screen during the inking experience portion of the video. Not one scratch was left on the screen. NOT ONE! The writing feel and scratch resistance of the Photodon has just set a new standard for the Shootout when price considerations are taken into account.

Outdoor Viewability:

Outdoor viewing was great. The AG cut down enough of the ambient glare that it was very pleasant on the eyes. With the screen at 100%, everything was viewable outdoors unless you hold the screen so the sun reflects directly back into your eyes. The Photodon AG was on par here as well with the best of them. With the screen off, the smudges can really be seen outdoors, but this is of little consequence because as soon as you turn the screen on, the smudges are hardly visible and does not negatively affect the overall outdoor viewing experience.

Screen Protector Removal:

Removing the screen protector was similar to the BoxWave. But since the screen protector itself is a little bit thinner than the BoxWave, it’s even trickier to get a corner to pry up for removal. It’s probably best to use a piece of masking tape and pick up the screen protector from a corner. I still can’t find my roll of tape. I have no idea where it went.

Conclusion:

At approximately a quarter the cost of the BoxWave line, Photodon is a very attractive alternative. Scratch resistance and writing feel are both spectacular. It makes me wonder how much these pieces of plastic are really worth and if charging anything above $20 constitutes price gouging. With the quality of the screen protector, coupled with its amazingly low price, Photodon has proven the old adage of “you get what you pay for” wrong. Considering its price to performance ratio, Photodon has set the bar for all other screen protectors in this roundup.

Stay tuned for the second half of Round 5 when I look at the Clear Photodon screen protector!

- Rob Bushway

Truc Bui continues his fantastic Screen Protector Shootout series, turning his focus to BoxWave's Crystal.

 

 

- Truc Bui

 

Summary:

Pros:

· Only screen protector so far that maintains the brilliance of the Fujitsu screen.

· Excellent coverage. Corner to corner coverage is on par with NuShield. The entirety of the protector adheres to the screen.

· Probably the best solution for standard notebooks if you want to add an extra layer of protection over your LCD screen.

Cons:

· Scratched very easily. It was as bad as the ProtecT for scratch resistance. Basically, once you ink, you’ll scratch.

· Price point is on the more expensive side at $40 for one and $70 for two.

· Application process is prone to picking up debris since the entire protector is adhesive. Be sure to work in a very clean environment. Lint-free gloves are recommended.

For the second part of round four of the Screen Protector Shootout, I take a look at Boxwave’s Crystal Clear screen protector. Unlike its anti-glare brother, the Crystal series is completely clear and boasts a 99% transmittance level. Adding on this screen protector should not affect image quality in any way. I’m having high hopes for this screen protector. If the AG film was any indication, Boxwave has a winning one-two combination that addresses the needs or wants of the tablet PC segment.

Initial Impressions:

The Boxwave Crystal film came in a nicely packaged envelope with clear instructions on the back cover. There aren’t any unnecessary frills. In the package are a cleaning cloth, an applicator card, and the screen protector itself. The screen protector had a great feel to it right out of the envelope. The protective backing that covers the adhesive comes with a tab that allows for easy peeling and installation. Additionally, another layer of protective plastic overlays the screen protector itself so the crystal clear properties will be protected. Installation should be on par with the AG screen.

Installation:

Having experience with the AG screen helped tremendously. Instead of fighting with the included applicator, I went straight for the wide width 3M squeegee. Since most people won’t have access to a 3M applicator, a decent replacement can be had with some thick poster board or matte board.

Preservation of Luminosity:

Optical quality with the Crystal line was phenomenal. It was like not having any screen protector on at all. The Crystal moniker is truly deserving here. I’ve almost forgotten how wonderful the native screen is with all the AG protectors I’ve used.

Writing Feel:

Where the AG shines, the Crystal falls flat. Smooth writing with just the right amount of resistance is now a catchy, squeaky unpleasantness. To top it off, the screen scratches. After a night’s worth of inking and browsing in slate mode, the screen protector introduced visible scratches even when the screen was on and impeded viewability.

Outdoor Viewability:

Due to the scratching, outdoor viewability was skipped. The video shows how much of the scratching you can see with the screen off. Taking it outside where the light intensity is greater would only exacerbate the problem.

Screen Protector Removal:

Removing the screen protector was relatively easy. The trickiest part was getting a corner to come up. Since there is no adhesive layer to increase the thickness of the protector, it took some careful prying to get it to release. I couldn’t find my roll of tape to see if removal that way would have worked.

Conclusion:

At $40, the Boxwave Crystal is pricey, especially considering it is prone to scratching. For non-tablet notebooks where inking is not involved, the Crystal is an ideal solution. If you’re at all an inker, I recommend the AG instead.

- Rob Bushway

In part 4 of our Screen Protector Shootout series, Truc Bui takes a look at BoxWave.

Video review below, text review below that

 

- Truc Bui

BoxWave Anti-Glare Screen Protector

Summary:

Pros:

· The best writing feel so far. The fluidity imparted is something that needs to be experienced. Scratch resistance is great, even with heavy inking.

· Excellent coverage. Corner to corner coverage is on par with NuShield. The entirety of the protector adheres to the screen.

· Anti-Glare properties very effective in reducing reflections.

Cons:

· Speckling is very noticeable compared to the competition. Almost too intrusive.

· Price point is on the more expensive side at $40 for one and $70 for two.

· Application process is prone to picking up debris since the entire protector is adhesive. Be sure to work in a very clean environment. Lint-free gloves are recommended.

 

For the fourth round of the Screen Protector Shootout, I take a look at BoxWave’s Anti-Glare screen protector. BoxWave has one of the most extensive product lines of screen protectors for a variety of LCD devices boasting almost 3000 products for all your digital gear. Abe was kind enough to send me both the Anti-Glare as well as the Crystal Clear protectors for this portion of the review. I will break down the two screen protectors and review them separately.

Initial Impressions:

The BoxWave AG film came in a nicely packaged envelope with clear instructions on the back cover. There aren’t any unnecessary frills. In the package are a cleaning cloth, an applicator card, and the screen protector itself. The screen protector had a great feel to it right out of the envelope. The protective backing that covers the adhesive comes with a tab that allows for easy peeling and installation. BoxWave’s application process should be more involved than those with the adhesive on just the perimeter.

Installation:

Installation was the trickiest yet. I tried using the included applicator but avoiding bubbling was almost impossible. I gave up and ended up using a 3M squeegee that spanned almost the width of the screen protector. With an adequately wide applicator (you can cut one out of heavy poster board), the application was pretty straight forward. Another tricky aspect is that this screen protector has corner-to-corner coverage, which means initial alignment is key. Since I didn’t line it up exactly right and was getting bubbles, I had to peel the protector back up to try and eliminate the bubbles. As a result, I ended up picking up two random bits of gunk that ended up getting trapped between the screen protector and the screen. This led to slight bubbling at the very edge of the screen. It’s no big deal as it does not impede on the viewability or functionality of the protector, but it is definitely an eyesore.

Preservation of Luminosity:

AG films give off some amount of speckling as a trade-off for eliminating the glare. As a result, every AG film (the matte looking variety) that I have reviewed so far has some speckling issue. The BoxWave definitely has more speckling than some of the competition. I would say it ranks right up there with the speckling you would get if you added the Fujitsu provided protectors. On dark web pages, the speckling is hardly noticeable. On lighter background pages, especially white pages, the AG screen protector introduces alternating red, green, and blue dots if viewed from straight ahead. The end result is a Christmas-lights effect on white pages that tests the boundaries of being too invasive and distracting to the overall tablet experience. The speckling factor is a glaring (pun intended) detriment to an otherwise excellent screen protector.

Writing Feel:

This is perhaps the BoxWave’s strongest selling point. The writing feel is phenomenal. I actually prefer it to writing on a naked screen. It is silky smooth yet gives just enough feedback to make inking a truly enjoyable experience. I am very impressed with BoxWave for their perfecting of the inking experience. The screen protector proved to be very resilient to scratches. Not one scratch is visible in the three days I have been using this screen protector with heavy inking use.

Outdoor Viewability:

I haven’t seen the sun in a few days, so I had to replicate the reflections by using my office lights. It’s not the most ideal testing simulation as halogen lights are of one particular wavelength whereas being outdoors actually gives you a broader spectrum of light, allowing for a true sense of viewability. With that said, the BoxWave AG screen did a wonderful job of diffusing the light just enough to eliminate a majority of the glare while preserving viewability, but of course, with the aforementioned speckling intrusion.

Screen Protector Removal:

Since the BoxWave has a completely adhesive backing, removing it was quite a bit trickier. Combined with the added benefits of being a full coverage screen protector, getting a corner to release itself was quite a bit tricky. I didn’t try the tape trick, but will use that method for the Crystal Clear review. Thankfully for me, I had the benefit of being able to pry up an edge due to the debris that was stuck between the screen and the protector. Once a corner is pried up, removal was quite simple.

Conclusion:

At $40, the BoxWave is the second most expensive protector of this roundup. With that said, the complete corner to corner coverage and scratch resistance is possibly worth the cost of admission. I can see this screen protector lasting quite a long time. The writing feel on the BoxWave is perhaps its most compelling attribute for me. I can deal with the speckling a lot more because of the absolute magnificence of the inking experience. Did I already say I really liked the inking experience?

Stay tuned for the second half of Round 4!

- Rob Bushway

Truc Bui continues his GBM User Ink Review Series "Screen Protector Shootout", this time focusing on NuShield.

The video portion of the review is below, followed by the text review. Next up will be BoxWave!

Be sure to read the entire series in the "Screen Protector Shootout."

 

- Truc Bui

NuShield, Inc.

Summary:

Pros:
•    Excellent coverage. Better corner to corner protection than Fujitsu provided screen protectors.
•    Great screen clarity and outdoor viewability.
•    Good price point at $20 + shipping ($5 for USPS)

Cons:
•    Writing feel was not perfectly smooth and consistent
•    Picked up a few (very few) hairline scratches.
•    They’re phasing out the clear screen protector and will only have the AG protector. (Is this even a con?)

For the third round of the Screen Protector Shootout, I take a look at NuShield’s screen protector. NuShield has been in the screen protector market for a long time now. Their product line is quite impressive. Basically, if you have a device with a screen, they make something for it. Their website can be found at www.nushield.com. For this review, I worked with Mark and he sent me NuShield’s newest AG protector.

Initial Impressions:

YAY! A screen protector with edge to edge coverage! I understand the need for a universal standard size in the manufacturing process in order to keep costs down, and that’s exactly why I am thoroughly impressed with NuShield’s attention to detail here. The NuShield’s coverage is actually better than the screen protectors that come with the Fujitsu T2010. The four adhesive strips run along the perimeter of the screen protector, so installation should be a snap. The NuShield is of good thickness. Further investigation on their website reveals that the NuShield AG is actually 4 layers thick.

Installation:

Installation was a snap. I was able to get the NuShield on without a hitch. The trickiest part is removing the adhesive strips. After that, it was a simple lay-on procedure that was easy and painless. The protector laid flat against the screen and was free from bubbles. The adhesive strips became clear and unobtrusive once the screen protector was on and pressure was applied to secure the adhesive.

Preservation of Luminosity:

The luminosity was great with the NuShield. The speckling that occurs with most, if not all, AG screen protectors was expected and was present with the NuShield. With that said, the speckling was not intrusive and preserved image quality.

Writing Feel:

The writing feel on the new NuShield AG was adequate. It was not as smooth as some of the other screen protectors tested, but it isn’t too bad. The writing feel was a tad inconsistent because it would catch in some directions in some parts of the screen. It was seemingly completely random. Perhaps all those layers bunch up with how hard I write. A lighter writing pressure smoothed out the writing experience greatly.

Outdoor Viewability:

The NuShield does a good job of preserving outdoor viewability. Under shade, the NuShield was on par with the WriteShield. Under direct morning sun, the NuShield performed almost as well as the WriteShield. In any case, at 100% brightness on the Fujitsu screen, outdoor viewing was very comfortable and only required a slight change in screen angle to remedy any washed-out glare caused by the sun.

Screen Protector Removal:

The NuShield was as easy to remove as it was to put on. Pry up a corner and peel away. Since the adhesive only resides on the edges, removing was quick and painless. The adhesive did not leave any residue after removal.

Conclusion:

Given its $25 price point, the NuShield is a great all-around protector. The only bad thing for me about it was the rough inking experience. If you’re a heavy inker, the NuShield might not be the best solution for you. If you’re a light inker, the NuShield’s complete screen coverage and AG quality makes it a very strong contender.

Highly Recommended!

Stay tuned for Round 4!

 

- Rob Bushway

Truc Bui continues his GBM User Ink Review Screen Protector Shootout series, this time focusing on WriteShield. Watch the video review below, and read the text review below that.

- Truc Bui 

Pocket PC Techs WriteShield

Summary:

Pros:

· Excellent inking experience.

· Great screen clarity and outdoor viewability.

· Comes with a lot of extra accessories.

Cons:

· Pricey! $60 a pop for a single protector and $100 for two.

· Due to being specially cut from a larger piece, the WriteShield didn’t sit flush edge to edge

· Installation process is much more daunting and is much more involved than your typical screen protector.

For the second round of the Screen Protector Shootout, I take a look at Pocket PC Techs’ WriteShield screen protector. Pocket PC Techs makes the WriteShield line of screen protectors and has a strong presence in the PDA market. They now include a full line of tablet PC products with many screen protectors coming in both their Crystal Clear and Anti-Glare varieties. For this review, Pocket PC Techs had yet to make a 12.1” widescreen option, so Sue (my contact at Pocket PC Techs) had one cut to size for this review.

Initial Impressions:

The one thing that stands out about the WriteShield is the box it comes in. If this test was on presentation alone, WriteShield wins hands down. They include the screen protector, a bottle of cleaning solution, two screen cloths, four single-use screen wipes, and a debris brush. The screen protector itself was nice and thick with a great quality feel to it. Seeing the instructions, however, gave me unpleasant flashbacks to when I first started doing dry-installs of screen protectors on my PDA’s. They were always cumbersome, always produced bubbles that were impossible to get rid of and were a complete pain to take off.

Installation:

The installation process wasn’t as bad as I thought. It definitely was a lot more involved than the screen protectors I have put on previously with just the edges adhering to the screen itself. The installation went off without a hitch. Since WriteShield specially cut a protector from a larger one specifically for this review, I was warned by Sue that the edges might not lay flat. After two days’ use, the edge of the screen protector separated slightly from the screen. It did not hamper usability at all, however.

Preservation of Luminosity:

The luminosity was great with the WriteShield. The speckling that occurs with most, if not all, AG screen protectors was expected and was present with the WriteShield. With that said, the speckling was not intrusive and preserved image quality.

Writing Feel:

One word: GREAT. The inking experience with the WriteShield is absolutely wonderful. It isn’t as raspy as the Fujitsu provided protector, doesn’t scratch, and is very smooth. I am amazed at the quality of the inking experience. So far, the WriteShield is setting the bar for inking experience.

Outdoor Viewability:

Outdoor viewability was excellent as well. Even though the screen protector is of the anti-glare variety, it actually proved to be great outside both under shade as well as in direct sunlight. I feel the WriteShield actually improves on outdoor viewability over no screen protector, and is leaps and bounds above the Fujitsu screen protector.

Screen Protector Removal:

Taking off the screen protector was painless, especially compared to the installation process. All you have to do is take a piece of tape and stick it on a corner of the protector. From there, the tape sticks to the protector and pries off the screen very easily.

Conclusion:

Although pricey, WriteShield definitely has a solid product. Minus the price, this screen protector comes highly recommended.

Stay tuned for Round 3!

- Rob Bushway

One of the first things new Tablet PC users ask about are screen protectors - which protect the screen the best, which ones are good for handwriting, which ones help with glare, etc. GBM forum member Tonkabui was asking the same things, and took it upon himself to contact a slew of screen protector manufacturers in order to present a complete review of available screen protectors for the GBM community.

His first review is on ProtecT, published here as a GBM User InkReview. Watch the video part of the review below, and read the textual review below.

- Truc Bui

Screen Protector Shootout

Introduction:

I have always used screen protectors on my touch-screen devices. It all started in 2001 when I bought my first PDA. The Handspring changed how I stayed organized, especially for college work. After 4 months of use, however, the Handspring was pretty scratched up and I had to buy another one. Since then, I have been a faithful user of screen protectors on all of my devices. I have screen protectors on my current PPC phone, my camera’s LCD, and of course, my Fujitsu T2010, which will serve as my test mule for this shootout. I think I might have an unnatural disdain for scratched viewing screens.

The first thing I did when I bought my computer in March was apply the screen protector. Immediately, I noticed the heavy sparkling introduced coupled with a decrease in screen clarity and the raspiness of the inking experience. It felt almost like writing on really really really fine sandpaper. Over the last two months, the Fujitsu protector has served its purpose, especially that time a colleague accidentally dropped his keys onto my computer in tablet mode. But in the end, I still am not happy with the writing feel of the stock protector, it was getting scratched up, and most importantly, the screen quality drastically diminished. I started researching which screen protector would work the best and preserve the amazing screen that Fujitsu is known for. The most I can come up were single reviews of a few brands. There are at least 8 brands of screen protectors out there, so I figured I’d ask the folks at GBM if they’d do an inkshow. I received word from Rob Bushway that if I was interested, I could do the reviews myself. So here I am, writing my first review… EVER. I apologize in advance if this review is lackluster in any way, both in written form and video form. Your feedback would be greatly appreciated.

The contestants for this shootout are (in the order they were received):

1) ProtecT Computer Products http://www.protectcovers.com

2) PocketPCTechs Writeshield http://www.pocketpctechs.com

3) NuShield http://www.nushield.com

4) Strong Engineering Inc. http://www.strongengineering.com

5) 3M Vikuiti http://www.3M.com

As of this writing, I am still awaiting product from:

6) Clarivue http://www.clarivue.com

7) InvisibleShield http://www.invisibleshield.com

8) Boxwave http://www.boxwave.com

Round 1:

ProtecT Covers

First up in the roundup is a solution from ProtecT screen protectors. ProtecT’s product line is quite impressive including keyboard covers, laptop covers, laptop lid protectors, screen protectors, and even rugged laptop cases. After contacting their online live technical support, I was connected directly with Gil Workman, the GM at ProtecT. He was very informative, very accommodating, and was more than happy to participate in my first comprehensive product review.

Initial Impressions:

I had high hopes for the ProtecT covers since Gil told me their biggest clients are in the health care industry and the military. Upon initial impressions, the ProtecT was well made. I was told the ProtecT was applied to field computers in Iraq and Afghanistan and had been field tested in Fort Hood to test durability and resiliency against scratches and pitting from being sandblasted in those harsh environments. From the looks of it, this screen protector will uphold those claims.

Installation:

There are four thin adhesive strips on the backside of the protector which made installation a breeze. There were no issues with bubbling and the protector sat nice and flush against the screen. Everything so far has been as described. The only thing that bothered me up to this point is the adhesive strips that invaded about 1/16 or 1/8 of the viewable area’s edge. This means that everything at the very edge of the screen is distorted due to the adhesive.

Preservation of Luminosity:

The screen protector was almost completely clear. The speckling that I was used to from the Fujitsu-provided screen protectors was non-existent. The ProtecT did a fine job of preserving the clarity and crispness of Fujitsu’s awesome screen right after installing. It did cut down glare quite a bit while preserving most of the clarity of the screen but was not intrusive like the stock screen protector. Unfortunately, the screen emitted a rainbow effect from some angles. Unlike Newton rings that are circular, these rainbows are vertical. It was quite odd and I’ve never experienced anything like it before. Even the stock screen protectors didn’t give me any Newton rings, contrary to other people’s experience.

Writing Feel:

It all fell apart for the ProtecT when I performed an inking test. Inking feel was great, initially. As I continued to write, I noticed an impression of what I was writing on the protector. Sure enough, the pen was leaving scratches on the protector. I hoped it was just residue either from my hand or from the peel-off from the protector. Unfortunately, the screen protector was indeed scratched. As I continued to use the tablet, the scratches got worse and writing feel deteriorated. After a full day’s use, I had to take off the screen protector because the scratches became such an eyesore and the inking experience diminished greatly due to the scratches. Writing over a scratched area of the screen resulted in awful noises and inconsistent inking since the pen would track the scratches.

Outdoor Viewability:

Outdoor use was a nightmare with all those scratches, so I skipped it in the video review for the ProtecT. Trust me when I say taking the computer outdoors after the inking test did the screen protector no favors.

Screen Protector Removal:

Taking off the screen protector was a snap. Since ProtecT leaves a gap in the adhesive between adjacent sides, I was able to easily pry the screen protector off.

Summary:

Pros:

· Cheap at $15 before shipping.

· Very good screen clarity (so long as you don’t ink)

· Easy to install and remove

Cons:

· Inking led to heavy scratching.

· Adhesive strips were within the viewing area.

· Rainbow effect similar to Newton rings except vertical rather than circular.

Stay tuned for Round 2!

 

- Warner Crocker

The HP tx2051 Entertainment PC has captured quite a bit of attention because of its very good dual digitizer and its comparatively low price point. Steve Seto is evaluating the HP  tx2051 Entertainment Notebook as I am. He's written up another very thorough user review of the device for GBM that covers quite a bit of territory. (Note: I'll be shooting video of the HP tx2051 this weekend).

tx2000 / tx2051 Pavilion Notebook PC

A User Review

29 April 2008

Bottom line first: The tx2051 is a competent convertible tablet with many nice features including a pretty reasonable street price. Perhaps in line with this price, I find that this convertible delivers only a slightly-above average tablet experience to the user and that there are a few design choices that seemingly could have been better integrated together. Note that I’m not saying that the tx2051 is poorly done…. I’m saying that it could have, and probably should have, been much better! The story here can’t be summarized in just a couple of sentences, so I invite you to read on…

Read more ...

- Rob Bushway

Steve Seto, a Microsoft Tablet PC MVP and frequent GottaBeMobile.com contributor, has written up a fantastic review of Dell's Latitude XT Tablet PC. There have been several reviews published in the last couple of months, but none with this depth and analysis.

- Steve Seto

Bottom line first: The Latitude XT is a pretty good convertible tablet, with a good blend of features and a couple of outstanding options. It’s also expensive, but some of that expense can be justified by the build quality, which is sturdy, and by those options, namely the DLV screen and the 64 GB SSD (solid state disk). In addition, the N-trig DuoSense pen and touch digitizer works exactly as advertised and with a very pleasant, light touch. Is the XT right for you? Read on and make your own decision…

- Rob Bushway

Chris Paris is a very active GottaBeMobile.com reader and forum member, helping others in our forums with tablet pc issues, etc. He's written the following article for us on how to blog in ink using Word 2007.

- Chris Paris 

I've been an early adopter of using MS Word 2007's blogging features, having used it for various blogs -- via WordPress -- since the software came out. Here's the latest , entirely blogged from within Word! A while back I wrote a tutorial on setting up Word 2007 for WordPress  - (pardon the comical pseudonym), and it's been well received, even though setting up WordPress under Word 2007 isn't exactly easy. One mistake, and Word will throw an obscure error, directing you to a minimalist help page that hasn't been updated since Word 2007 came out.  However, my tutorial should work fairly well even if you blog from some other provider, and Word 2007 includes native support for Windows Live Spaces, Blogger, SharePoint Blog, Community Server, WordPress and Typepad. A "refresh list" option right on the dialog box hints that it will auto-update to include additional support for newer blog services, but I can't confirm that.

- Matt Faulkner

Introducing forum member - Sierra - You have the helm!!

I recently decided to go back to school for my Masters degree, so naturally I started thinking about what Tablet PC I could use. I did some research and didn’t really find anything that excited me – until I saw the HP Compaq 2710p. I have always loved my HP Compaq TC1100 and this new Tablet PC seemed to have some of the features that I love from that system. The morning it became available, I bought it. J

Review System Specifications

• HP Compaq 2710p Notebook PC (RM272UT) ~ $1750 (on special until Aug 31)
• Intel® Core™2 Duo ULV processor U7600 1.20 GHz 2 MB L2 cache 533 MHz front side bus
• 2 GB 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM
• 100 GB 4200 rpm SMART PATA
• 12.1 in Illumi-Lite, WXGA UWVA, anti-glare with Digitizer
• Integrated 2 MP camera (1600 x 1200 max resolution)
• 1 Express Card/54
  1 secure digital
• 11.42 x 8.35 x 1.11 in (290.00 x 212.00 x 28.20 mm)
• 3.7 lb (1.68 kg)

Unboxing first impressions

The box was small and light and there just wasn’t much in there.

However, everything I needed was present. One surprise was that it came with a full license of OneNote 2007. Although I had planned to install OneNote already, it was nice to have the full license already there. Also great for anyone getting a Tablet PC for the first time.

- Rob Bushway

Steve S, a GottaBeMobile.com reader and frequent reviewer, recently spent some time with TabletKiosk and their new Sahara i440D Slate Tablet PC. As is typical for Steve, he has written up a very detailed review of the new i440D and his time spent with the good folks at TabletKiosk.

Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi: Fortune (is the) Empress of the World, and it was by the kindness of Fortune that I was given the opportunity last Friday to demo the new Sahara i440D dual mode (dual digitizer) slate and talk to some of the kind folks at TabletKiosk about their new product.

To start from the beginning, I was in Los Angeles late last week to attend a series of all-day technical meetings. My schedule was full. Looking in on the GottaBeMobile website at intervals, I read about Allegiance Technology’s planned demo of several tablet models in Orange County, just a short drive from where I was staying. Misreading the date, I posted a short lament that here I was only a few short miles away, but unable to attend because I was obligated full time to my company activities. I really wanted to see the new TK slate!

Later that day, I received a very nice e-mail from Gail Levy, TK’s Director of Marketing, inviting me to come over to their offices in Torrance. I could see the i440D there. Game on!

So late Friday morning, after my meetings were finally finished, I drove over and met with Gail and a member of the TK technical staff; we spent an hour playing with an i440D and talking about its design.

To cut directly to the bottom line, the i440D is a well-thought-out product, and the inclusion of touch screen capability sets a new level of utility for mobile platforms. The novelty of being able to use my fingertip to open windows and menus, select options and close applications took only a minute to get used to, but in that same minute it also became a must have feature. Others have reported exactly the same reaction; see Kevin Tofel’s comment at http://tinyurl.com/2r973o . But enough for now; back to our story.

TK is a boutique OEM. They create their own hardware requirements and work with a Taiwanese manufacturing group to create their products. This manufacturing group apparently works with many clients and has broad access to technologies of many types, so TK is able to create whatever type of product they wish, within reason.

By now, you’ve all seen pictures of the Sahara i440D and read descriptions of its basic features. Therefore, I won’t spend very much time reiterating these basics, except to say that the i400 family comprises three slate-style tables that feature different combinations of CPU’s and touch or active digitizing screens (or both). The i440D features a Boe Hydis 12.1” screen which is very slightly inset into the front frame. The screen is flanked by two columns of small, square, flush-mounted push buttons (when held in landscape orientation). These pushbuttons have very short travel, but good feel. I didn’t ask about button configurability, but I presume that they are.

The slate features a full array of ports, including IEEE 1394a FireWire, PCMCIA and eSATA ( ! ). The stylus appears to be a standard Wacom design with pocket clip, eraser and single switch ( I think…) The stylus garage is in the lower right corner and cleverly designed so that the pocket clip serves to hold the stylus in. Along the top edge, there are separate slide switches for On/Off, Bluetooth and WiFi. Each slide switch has an attractive blue LED within the slide part of the switch to denote status. (I particularly like this approach of having discrete hardware switches for these functions, as well as front face pushbuttons for screen rotation and, if equipped, touch versus active digitizing).

 TK derives their tablet designs from the needs of five specific vertical markets and uses focus groups to vet features and refine these designs and the new i440D reflects this process. One of the things that really impressed me was that for every question that I asked, they had a logical-seeming explanation… sometimes quite lengthy! For example, the i440D is a bit unusual because it is arranged to favor the landscape, rather than the portrait, orientation. TK explained that this was what their focus groups recommended, in part because of the way that these users thought they would use a touch-enabled device. However, it didn’t end there. TK pointed out that the location and arrangement of the buttons on the frame (or bezel) were picked specifically to allow the longer edges of the frame to remain relatively narrow, so that the tablet would not end up appearing too square-ish (and clunky-looking). Further, when the screen is rotated to the portrait orientation, the 5 function buttons are now along the lower edge, where they can easily be reached with your thumb. A clever approach, indeed!

This same attention to detail applied to the location of the PCMCIA slot. In portrait orientation, the slot is on the top of the left hand corner, a good place if the card is any type of radio transceiver device. When rotated to portrait mode (in a clockwise direction), the PCMCIA slot is now on the upper right side, again a good location for a transceiver! These little design touches cropped up again and again in our discussions.

The tablet that I demo’ed was a prototype, with pasted-on labels. Gail showed me an example with the final production frame with lettering, which was very tastefully done. The prototype had the white case, which looks somewhat Apple-esque. It turns out this that is no coincidence, since some of the designers that TK works with have experience with Apple products. I asked about the black case, and TK explained that it isn’t simply black-colored. They elected to use a thin, black elastomer coating which provides both the color and a non-slip grip. Gail thinks that users will find it good-looking. All I can say is that I’ve handled instruments that use a similar coating, and it’s both durable and very effective.

 

The case is almost exactly one inch thick, and although it is comfortably rounded on all the edges, it looks (and is) kind of boxy. Why was I not surprised to discover that they had a reason for that, too? It starts with the need for good thermal management. The boxy shape provides room for good airflow through the interior of the tablet. Sculpting the edges (as, say, Fujitsu does) to get a sexier shape would have reduced this advantage. In addition, the boxy shape provides for a narrow impact or “crumple zone” around the edges; if the tablet is dropped, the frame may get cracked, but the interior electronics have some protection. Both in my hands and resting on my forearm, balance seemed excellent; no side seemed obviously heavier than another.

Speaking about thermal management, I asked them whether they had considered more sophisticated approaches for this critical need. TK said that they and their Taiwanese partners were familiar with a variety of approaches, but TK chose to take an entirely pragmatic approach keyed to cost effectiveness. As mentioned above, the boxy design provides needed room for air flow over all the critical components; TK implemented a 2-vent, straight-through (literally “from one side to the other”) airflow using conventional thermal management components. They also talked a bit about the benefits of fixed-speed versus variable speed fans. The prototype that I handled appeared to have a variable speed fan installed and I never once heard any noticeable fan noise. I can only say that whatever the TK approach is, it is effective; the slate was only modestly warm and I couldn’t feel any hotspots at all. Gail claimed that the tablet had been running for at least the last 24 hours and had recently been on its AC adaptor. Even so, the slate showed no signs of it!

Touching briefly on the internal electronics, TK noted that the motherboard was kept smaller than usual so that it would fit into a range of somewhat smaller cases. (TK did not say that they intended to issue any smaller designs in the foreseeable future; I simply got the impression that they were thinking ahead.) They also commented that to the degree possible, the internal electronics were kept modular (presumably to make the slate easy to service). For example, the external power interface was a module that plugged into the motherboard.

The back of the case is almost perfectly flat. The battery fits into one edge and there is a docking connector almost exactly in the center of the back. TK has thoughtfully provided three access doors, one for RAM access, one for HD access and one for access to the wireless card. The slate can take up to 4 GB of RAM and uses the 2.5” HD form factor. TK mentioned that with all the activity in new and existing wireless technologies, access to the wireless card would be important for those who wanted to upgrade their WiFi or perhaps migrate to EVDO or some other future connectivity option. Each of the doors looked to be simple to open and reseal. What was really obvious here was that TK recognizes that component technologies are fast changing, and they’ve taken the right measures to make sure that the user can upgrade easily and without taking the slate completely apart. (However, TK mentioned that the CPU is soldered onto the motherboard and is therefore not upgradable.)

The standard battery is good for about 3.5 hours of operation. TK says that they will eventually offer an external battery that will have a flat, rectangular form factor so that it will cover the entire back (presumably like the Motion external battery). The battery will connect to the tablet via the docking connector.

About the only thing that I didn’t like about the design of the case was the rubber feet, which are small and round but struck me as being unusually high (almost like little stubby table legs). They’re really not excessively high, but I thought they spoiled the modest lines of the case.

Finally, we came back to the real star of this show, the dual mode display. As I mentioned above, TK is using the Boe Hydis wide viewing angle XGA display combined with a TK proprietary touch screen overlay. Of course, the surface of this overlay is what you both write on and touch. The screen viewing angles appear to be perfectly normal and extend to the usual high off-normal angles that we’ve all come to expect from Boe Hydis screens. More importantly, I couldn’t see any obvious optical penalties associated with the touch screen overlay. None! The screen resolution and clarity seemed completely unaffected. About the only thing that I didn’t like about the screen was that it is ever-so-slightly inset into the frame; that is, there’s a thin ledge surrounding the screen. I’ve always found insets to be distracting when I’m trying to write, and I really wish that TK had done a more flush integration, but I understand that this sort of thing is sometimes a design compromise. At least the ledge isn’t pronounced!

The surface of the screen had a slight “give” to it; it was not hard-surfaced and rigid like a conventional screen. Of course with the touch functionality, something like this was not unexpected. I tried inking with the stylus only long enough to ensure that the active digitizing part of the dual mode worked entirely as one would expect, which it did. When I asked how durable the surface of the dual mode screen was, Gail mentioned that TK started out as a touch screen manufacturer, and that similar screens were being used for POS (point of sales) applications in places like Las Vegas, where they get used and abused nearly 24 hours a day. Those screens held up well and TK was expecting that their new slate would, too. For what it’s worth, I had no significant impression that the screen surface was at all fragile, despite the slight “give.”

The screen seemed to be a bit prone to reflections and glare; the surface layer appeared to have a light matte finish, but apparently had no real anti-reflection coating. I asked if a screen protector could be used without interfering with the touch function, and TK said yes. My immediate thought was that a Vikuiti ™ screen protector might improve the screen visibility slightly and would also provide the extra surface protection that I think nervous users are going to want (regardless of TK’s experience).

Without repeating myself too much, the touch functionality was a revelation! I’ve used touch screens before (quite extensively, actually) but in this setting it was somehow new and immediate. The prototype was running XP, rather than Vista, so I didn’t get the most up-to-date experience but even so, touching on the start button and selecting an application was both easy and fun! As handy as a stylus is, I quickly found myself not wanting to go back to only having active digitizing. I suddenly wanted it all! TK’s screen was both sensitive and responsive, and it was easy to touch and “click” on small icons and tabs despite my fat fingers. TK talked briefly about the trades between 80 and 120 gram touch screens. Because of the dual mode, TK selected the 80 gram version for their slate and to me, it felt perfect. We also talked about palm rejection and, again, because of the dual use aspect, they don’t think that it’s needed. (Palm rejection figures prominently if you are writing, but TK points out that if you have dual mode, the natural tendency will be to use the pen to write in active mode, where the weight of your palm isn’t a factor.)

The bottom line here is that I couldn’t really find anything of real significance to fault in this new dual mode screen --- except, of course, for that thin ledge!

Before I had to leave, TK revealed one last interesting fact. Almost as an afterthought, I asked them what kind of software (you can read “crapware” here, if you like!) bundle they were intending to offer with the i440D. I was both pleased and astonished when Gail said: “None.” She went on to explain that their various clients generally had their own specialized software needs and for that reason, it made no sense for TK to bundle any add-ons with the slate. For users who were interested, she said that the TK website had links to various software partners that TK has agreements with.

Will wonders never cease???

Steve S

St. Louis, MO

- Warner Crocker

The blogosphere comes to the rescue for those looking for info to clear up the (at the moment) mysteries of which devices will or will not work with Vista’s ReadyBoost feature. Craig Pringle and Chippy at Carrypad have been doing some digging and come with up a couple of handy resources.

Grant Gibson has started a ReadyBoost Compatibility Chart that anyone can contribute to. Darryl Burling sent Craig an email pointing to this post by Tom Archer that explains the ReadyBoost requirements.

I’m sure we’ll get more info in the next few months, but these are a couple of excellent resources if you’re trying to decide on how to take advantage of the ReadyBoost feature.

Here’s a link to my original post on the issue.

- Rob Bushway

GottaBeMobile.com reader and forum member Steve S has been putting the FrogPad keyboard through some in-depth testing and has released a GBM User Review of the FrogPad keyboard.

As a Tablet PC user, Steve knows a thing or two about mobility, and he offers up just about everything you would want to know about this marvel of a keyboard. I've been evaluating it as well, and am astounded at the depths Steve has gone in this review.

If you are an Ultra-Mobile PC or slate Tablet PC user looking for an alternative keyboard, you should read Steve's review and determine if it could be for you.

• Read this GBM User Review of the FrogPad keyboard.

Pricing at www.FrogPad.com:

• Right & left white FrogPad - Bluetooth, $150
• Right white FrogPad - USB, $120
• Right & left black FrogPad (BlackFrog500) - USB, $130

- Rob Bushway

In this first installment of User InkReviews at GottaBeMobile.com, GBM reader Steve S takes an extensive look at xThink’s MathJournal 2.

As a daily user of MathJournal, Steve is well qualified to give us the inside story on MathJournal, what works, what still needs work, and how much improved MathJournal 2 is over MathJournal 1. Steve has his Bachelor of Science in Aeronautical & Astronautical Engineering and his Masters of Science in Gasdynamics from the University of Michigan. He uses MathJournal daily in his job in the technology and manufacturing business. Steve knows his math and he knows MathJournal inside and out. In addition, Steve is the top contributor to the xThink support forum at TabletPCBuzz.com.

• Read this User InkReview on MathJournal 2
• Visit xThink

Price:

NEW: MathJournal 2.0
Regular $249; Student $119

MathJournal Classic
Regular $149; Student $69

UPGRADE: from MathJournal Classic to MathJournal 2.0
Regular $100; Student $50

UPGRADE: from MathJournal 1.1 to MathJournal 2.0
Regular $69; Student $39

FREE UPGRADE for recent customers:
You can upgrade to MathJournal 2.0 for free, if you bought MathJournal 1.1 on or after June 1st, 2005.